Re: [Apn] [arch-d] Questions for APN: Q#3 and Q#4

Hi Shuping,

Thank you for including arch-d. Yes, what you’re proposing is a major architectural shift.

I’ve read some of your documents and it seems like you are interested in changing much more than a few routing protocols.  This would make major changes to the data plane throughout the Internet as well as the management plane.  

Is there a discussion anywhere of the costs of this approach and a cost/benefit analysis? Have you considered the scalability of a solution?  What about the added complexity to the architecture? My apologies if I’ve missed something obvious.

Regards,
Tony

> On Sep 17, 2020, at 10:35 PM, Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshuping@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
>  
> Following the previous emails on the first two questions, I will continue the discussions on Question #3 and #4.
> I have also copied the arch-d and network-tokens mailing lists since these two questions would be relevant to a larger community.
>  
> #3. Which area in IETF would the APN work fit better?
> Answer: Since APN mainly focuses on the application-aware network service provisioning within the network domain, and the potential work items are all on the RTG area from the data plane to the control & manage planes. Therefore, the RTG area in IETF fits better. For the potential work items please refer to this presentation,
> https://github.com/APN-Community/IETF108-Side-Meeting-APN/blob/master/4%20Shuping%20Peng%20-%20Huawei%20-%20Application-aware%20Networking%20(APN)%20Framework.pdf <https://github.com/APN-Community/IETF108-Side-Meeting-APN/blob/master/4%20Shuping%20Peng%20-%20Huawei%20-%20Application-aware%20Networking%20(APN)%20Framework.pdf>
>  
> #4. What is the relationship between APN and other attempts in IETF’s history?
> Answers: The attempts in history mainly focus on carrying the applications’ requirements at the transport layer not at the network layer like APN.
> Please refer to this draft about the attempts: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-13 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-13>.
>  
> Best regards,
> Shuping
>  
>  
> From: Apn [mailto:apn-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:apn-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 10:07 AM
> To: apn@ietf.org <mailto:apn@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Apn] Question List for APN
>  
> Dear all,
>  
> I am going to start posting the answers to the listed questions based on the previous work and discussions. If you have any comments please let us know. Thank you!
>  
> #1. Which layer is for APN to do the application-aware work?
> Answer: The IP network layer. When the application-information is carried on this layer, it can be read by the routers along the path as well as the middle boxes, which makes the network aware of the applications in a native manner.
>  
> #2. Does APN provide services within a limited-domain or Internet?
> Answer: The main purpose of APN is to provide application-aware network services to the customers within the controlled operators’ networks. Therefore, it is within a limited domain.
>  
> Best regards,
> Shuping
>  
>  
> From: Lizhenbin 
> Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 10:35 PM
> To: apn@ietf.org <mailto:apn@ietf.org>
> Cc: Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshuping@huawei.com <mailto:pengshuping@huawei.com>>
> Subject: Question List for APN
>  
> Hi Folks,
> Thanks very much for your attention to APN work. After much preparation work, we summarized the key questions to be clarified for APN which also were always asked. In fact in the past discussion and the APN side meeting of IETF108, many of these questions were discussed and clarified. Here we propose these questions together for your convenience.
>  
> The questions to be clarified are as follows:
> #1. Which layer is for APN to do the application-aware work?
> #2. Does APN provide services within a limited-domain or Internet?
> #3. Which area in IETF would the APN work fit better?
> #4. What is the relationship between APN and other attempts in IETF’s history?
> #5. What are the valuable use cases/usage scenarios of APN?
> #6. Is the fine-granularity operations needed/desired in the network?
> #7. Why not just use DSCP?
> #8. Does APN violate network neutrality?
> #9. Will APN raise security issues since application-aware information is carried in the APN packets?
> #10. Will APN raise privacy issues since application-aware information is carried in the APN packets?
>  
> Shuping Peng will send the detailed answers for these questions in the mailing list in the following one or two weeks. The questions and answers may be not only be sent in the APN mailing list, but also be copied to the architecture discussion mailing list and the network token mailing list for more cross-area feedback if necessary.
>  
> If you have any comments on these questions and answers, we can go on to discuss through the mailing list.
>  
>  
> Best Regards,
> Zhenbin (Robin)
>  
>  
>  
>  <> 
> From: Apn [mailto:apn-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:apn-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Lizhenbin
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:22 PM
> To: apn@ietf.org <mailto:apn@ietf.org>
> Subject: [Apn] Welcome to APN Mailing List
>  
> Hi Folks,
>  
> Welcome to join the APN mailing list. We are glad to have more discussion through the mailing list as the follow-up of the IETF108 APN side meeting.
> In the process of APN work, many historic work items such as SPUD, PLUS, etc. have been proposed. It has been tried to be clarified that APN focuses
> on the network layer and limited domains. Concerns on the security and privacy issues also have been proposed many times about the work. It also
> has been tried to be clarified that in the trustable limited domains the security and privacy issues can be under control. These are the reasons why APN
> work is based in the RTG area instead of ART/TSV areas.
>  
> But because of too much historic work to be clarified and its proposing the cross-area discussion for which RTG/APP/TSV/INT/SEC/IRTF are involved, it is
> necessary to have more discussion to clarify the scope and work items for APN. We wish the mailing list would be helpful to the work and promoting the
> cross-area communication to understand each other better.
>  
> You can get yourself up to speed with our discussions so far by seeing the materials at < https://github.com/APN-Community/ <https://github.com/APN-Community/>>, especially the materials
> From the virtual IETF 108  APN side meeting at < https://github.com/APN-Community/IETF108-Side-Meeting-APN <https://github.com/APN-Community/IETF108-Side-Meeting-APN>>. This link also gives you pointers to
> some of the relevant Internet-Drafts.
>  
> Over the next few weeks we will try to guide discussion by introducing some questions for debate. But please also raise your own issues and concerns
> and contribute to the exchanges on this list.
>  
> Look forwarding to have more fun discussion in the mailing list.
>  
>  
> Best Regards,
> Dan & Zhenbin
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list
> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org <mailto:Architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>